projet stargate cia-rdp96-00787r000100020001-0

Progress Report No. 3 Covering the Period 1 April to 1 August 1974

Stanford Research Institute Project 3183

PERCEPTUAL AUGMENTATION TECHNIQUES

by

Harold E. Puthoff

Client Private

Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

'\ i

App~oved For Release 2000/08/10 : CiA,.RDP9.6::00787R0001 00020001.:.0

.....

- -

-- -

1SEC.- CLeN vt~; nToP.D .. , CONTROL N? . ~ -;-- ~\\

S Ori Reae~ IDet.- DDStll';.tOl.B-76 .. . f i DATE OF DOC I D:AT&: REC'D I DATE OUT \SUSPENSE DATE CROSS REFERENCE OR. 1 ;J)ec 1m 2L26lT6

ToExecutive Officer, FROM

POINT OF FILING -

DDS&T ..

DATE. Harold E. .Puthoff It Russell 'far; ROUTING SENT. SUBJ. PEP.CEPl11.At .AUJME~TIO~~DIQUES. mtnrs&.T:

(Fint~l Report) - -~ --- -Ps.rt One- .. EIECU'ITlE SfJi.f,~Y ( cri 21

,...,. Put 'Ivo - MSEARCH REfORl' ( c;f# 16 " j

ee'd :R part l & 2

COURIER NO.

--4-- ------r- ------

.COURIER NO.

_,

.,

..

.- <

4' I ANSWERED J NO REPLY ------------ --- . ~---" .... -----------~- .. _.,_ -'--!.....~. :""' -~-~-~...-.

CONTROL NO.. . _,.:. _,_

~~:tol,8:76 CROSS- REFERENCE OR

POINT OF FILING

----~

Approved For Release ~000/08/1 0 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0

!

'

r

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0

I OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the program is to determine the characteristics of

those perceptual"modalities through which individuals obtain irJormation

about their environment, wherein such information is not presented to

any known sense.

The program is divided into two categories of investigation of

approximately equal effort, applied research and basic research. The

purpose of the applied research effort is to explore experimentally

the potential for applications of perceptual abilities of interest,

correlates and basic mechanisms involved -in such functioning.



A. Applied Research

1. Remote Viewin~

(a) Project Atlas Remote Viewing

A remote-viewing experiment has been carried out on a client-

designated target of interest, a European R&D test facility. 'I'he experiment,

carried out in three phases, had as its goal the determination of the utility

of remote-viewing under operational conditions.

In phase I, map coordinates were furnished to the experimenters, -~~~ "i

the only additional information provided being the designation of the target - --~---

as an R&D test facility. The experimenters then carried out a remote viewing

experiment with Subject l*(~n a double-blind basis. The results of the experiment were turned over to client representatives for data evaluation.

Figure 1 shows the level of detail for a sample early effort

at building layout, and Figure 2 shows the subject's first effort at drawing

a gantry crane he observed, both results being obtained on a double-blind

basis bBfore exposure to client-held information. An artist's conception of

the site as known to the client (but not to contract personnel)prior to the

experiment is shown in F:i.gure 3.

Were the results not promising,the experiment would have

stopped at this point. The results were judged to be of sufficiently good

quality, however, that Phase II was entered in which the subject was made

witting by client representatives.

A second round of experimentation ensued with participation

-------------------------------------------------------------------

* Numerical designations for subjects are discussed in Section B.


0 . ~o

......

. . -. .. .

. . .

... ..

. ..

. ..

DD no~. O[)

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0 [')

(

\

i ~~ 0 "t: 1flf

. , '

...

---~----------~----~---

'

-. ----------~--fi------'-~--- . . t..~_j.J . ~ "

&>

I I j I t /

--- -------------------.. --- .. --- ... ---- . --i------'1----~-------- ______ ......

J -- --- --- -

..2 _SIJ:B.J.ECT EFF.O.RT_AT CRANE CONSTRUCTION Approved For Release 2riblfitiM u-: t,TA~DPsG.::oo787R0001 00020001-0

l i

. :t: . "'-;;;;; ----.

'~ . ~

....

Approved For Release 2000108110 : CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

\ \

Approved For Release 2000108110: CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0


of client representatives. The Phase II effort was focussed on the generation

of physical data which could be client-verified, providing a calibration in

the process. The end. ,of Phase II gradually evolved into the first part of

Phase III, the generation of unverifiable data not available to the client,

but of interest nonetheless. Evaluation of the data by the client is under-

way.

---

- ~. j.~A- ~J! Subjects b. and 4 participated in a long-distance experiment I '{ffJ.VI (b) Costa Rica Remote Viewing Experiment

. .D,~/ .. ,A involving a Central American target series. In this experiment, one of the fO ~v? experimenters (Dr. Puthoff) spent a week traveling through Costa Rica on a (itfiM I combination business/pleasure trip. That is all that was known to the subjects A/o

I

about the traveler's itinerary. The experiment called for Dr. Puthoff to

keep a detailed record of his location and activities, including photographs,

each day at 1330 PDT. Six daily responses were obtained from Subject 1, five

from Subject 4.

The results were of high quality and are presently being

evaluated in detail, containing as they did a large amount of material.

Samples of that data are as follows.

Of the five daily responses obtained from Subject 4, two

were in excellent agreement, two had elements in common but were not clear

correspondences, and one was clearly a miss. In the first of the two matches,

Dr. Puthoff was driving in rugged terrain at the base of a volcano i ? (Figure 4) and the subject's response was "large bare table mountain, , ~~tJ '

,/""~~ /~ j)l / .. """ ,A.fl;t Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0 7 r' ~,-


juiiglte below, dark cool moist atmosphere," a match both with regard to

topography and ambience. In the second match the subject submitted that

all she got was a "picture of Dr. Puthoff sitting in a beach chair by a

pool," which was entirely correct. . --- - - ..

During the course of the Central Amer.ica e:Xperiment, on one

occasion when the test subject was unavailable, an experimenter volunteered

a drawing of an image he obtained at the beginning of one of the daily ex'-!'i .

periments. (The target for that day was an airport, an unexpected target

associated with a side excursion at midpoint of the week's activity.) The

match was good, as shown in Figures 5 and;6. The transcript data will be

examined further to determine fine structure, resolution, etc.

(c) Local Targets with Feedback

In this series of experiments, designed to give immediate

data to experimenters, a subject is asked to take part in a remote vieWing

experiment under the following conditions. ~---

The subject and two experimenters (one of whom was R.T.) I

l are in a first floor laboratory in building 30 at SRI. A second experimenter I '

(H.P.) leaves the area and proceeds to a remote location of his choosing.

None of the experimenters with the subject knew of the remote target location.

H.P. and R.T. are in two-way radio communication via walkie-talkie, (a) to

provide the experimenter at the target location real-time data and (b) to give

the subject immediate feedback after he has made his assessment of the target. . A

~)1!P ~~y Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0


0\ ~ I

M u; N

I


4//.2/7.1 oc '(' .. --. q 1-.,

I _ .. ;;.. S - A] o

( Sa.:, j

SA-2613-20

FIGURE 6 SKETCH PRODUCED BY SUBJECT FROM SAN ANDRES, COLOMBIA, AIRPORT USED AS REMOTE VIEWING TARGET



By this means the subject has an opportunity to learn to separate real from

imagined images. This is not considered to be a demonstration-of-apility

test, but rather a training step on a gradient scale of ability. In many

of these experiments we monitor physiological correlates as discussed in

Section B.3 (b). (Nine of these experiments have been completed to date,

seven with the measurements of physiological correlates.)

The following is a sample of an experiment with Subject 4.

In this experiment we m.oni tored physiolocial correlates of the remote

viewing activity.

As is apparent in the following text, the subject initially

had only a fragmentary picture of the remote site, but with what we judge to

be a small amount of feedback, the subject was able to put images together

into a correct description. Accompanying the verbal description presented

below is a photograph of the actual scene at the remote location (Fig. 7).

The experimenter with the subject (R.T.) was, as always, kept ignorant of the

target location to prevent guidance in the questioning. The capital letters

signify walkie-talkie communication.

R.T.: It is now 12:35.

S-4: very strong diagonal. . like a zigzag that goes this -way, vertically.

R.T.: 8-4's FIRST IMPRESSION IS OF A VERY STReNG DIAGONAL ZIGZAG THAT'S GOING VERTICALLY. OVER. (Talking on walkie talkie to H.P.)

1-I.P.: '!'HERE IS A STRONG ZIGZAG AT MY PLACE, BUT IT IS NOT VERTICAL BUT RATHER HORIZONTAL; BUT IF SHE IS LOOKING FROM THE AIR, THAT'S EXACI'LY WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE. OVER.

R.T.: Can you tell what the zigzag is attached to? Whether it's part of a building or a fence on the ground?


'Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0

R.T.: It's 12:41.

S-4: My head gets in the way now that he's said that it's horizontal. I usually think of a fence.

R. T.: Why don't you go up and look down and view the whole thing from above and see if you can get the whole gestalt of where he is.

S-4: .. definitely a non-y,egetation . almost no vegetation around. It's mostly concrete and whatever that zigzag is--either water or steel--shiny, zigzag, definitely shiny.

R. T.: 7!~67, THE ZIGZAG IS A SHINY THING WHETHER IT'S STEEL OR

S-4: Water .

R.T.: WATER, Y'1"'E CAN'T TELL. IT'S SHINY AND THERE'S VERY LITTLE VEGETATIO..'fo-NO VEGETATION AROUND~

S-4: Mostly concrete

R. T.: I 'I'' S MOSTLY CONCRETE

S-4: He's standing on concrete

R. T. : YOU'RE STANDING ON CONCRETE. OVER o

H .P.: IT CERTAINLY IS TRUE THAT THIS IS SHINY AI.'\ID IN MY NEAR VICINITY IT IS BARREN AND CONCRETE OR OONCRETE-cOLORED EARTH. SHE SAID TR

Approved. For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-.RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0

R. T.: S -4 SEES MOVEMEN"T IN 'HE ZIGZAG THING, SO SHE THINKS THAT IT'S WATER, AND A KIND OF LAYOUT OF CHANNELS AS THOUGH IT WAS A MAN -il.ffi.DE WATERWORKS WITH WATER RUNNING IN ZIGZAG CHANNELS. OVER.

H.P. THAT IS PRECISELY CORRECT. IT IS A ZIGZAG :rviAN-:tv1ADE WATER CHANNEL WITH CONCRETE SIDES. OVER.

S-4: I can't believe it.

The above is an exce:rpt from an early experiment, and is typical, rather_.... .....___..

a sample of exceptionally good quality. That experiment continued with four

more site i descriptions, three of which were of equal quality.

OnEl experiment of this nature has been carried out with Subject 1,

one with Subject 2, two with Subject 3, and five with Subject 4. A number

of descriptions were essentially free of error and with no feedbac~ other t~an 1

j~_pv1\ ~ \:{) ~~(~"'\ ~ ? rJJJ ~t~}J~ ~ \ 'I rlr,

A complete analysis is to be carried out on these transc;ip'ts following ~~ (1,":}1 more experimentation. To date it appears that the viewing is weak in the ~ ,.;#1 following areas: (a) perspective and dimension are often distorted (an f"" _J;;,

verification following the remote viewer's description.

eight foot tower is taken to be 50 feet tall, a 20 foot separation between )IJ/ 0 '? ;," I II/' ./ ~ ;' (b) written material f.:__ liJr

~Jit;vvl ~J ~,~ J.. ~ fi!V ~~'pti /,t v~v~v C ,-In two remote viewing experiments, the second of which was ~ , rJI(/{;1

-tv~"/"'

bui lding~l may appear to be 100 feet, etc.) and,

generally cannot be read.

(d) Local Targets with Azimuth Bearing

clearly correct from a descriptive standpoint, an effort was made to determine

whether tn driving the subject around the area it would be possible to determine

The l triangulation lines were essentially uncorrelated with each other and with

the location of the target team by triangulation with a bearing compass.

~jj~. 'lr1/ ~ ,VJ/ . ~' Approved For Release 2000/08/~ef= ~llRDP9~87~olf6~od~o~~lJ,At.1

rrv1 o-1'- / ~\}) ~t ~ J~1~

Approved For Release 2000/08/1 O: CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 0002000f-O

B. Basic Research

In addition to the testing of individuals under conditions which ,

'! yield data indicating the feasibility of the application of paranormal

abilities to operational needs, fifty percent of the effort is devoted

to:

1. Identification of measurable characteristics possessed by

gifted individuals (20%);

2. Identification of neurophysiological correlates which relate

to paranormal activities (20%);

3. Identification of the nature of paranormal phenomena and energy

(10%) .

To meet these objectives four specific requirements must be ful-

filled during the course of experimentation: 1) establish" and apply criteria

to differentiate between those for whom paranormal ability is considered

to be functional and those for whom it is not; 2) obtain sufficient medical I I

and psychological data to establish baseline profiles against which I

(a) one individual may be compared with another, and (b) an individual

may be compared to himself at different times to determine whether para-I

normal functioning occurs in an altered neurophysiological state, 3) specific

validation experiments must be conducted with sufficient control to ensure

that all conventional communication paths are blocked, and with outcomes

sufficiently unambiguous to determine whether paranormal functioning

occurred; 4) obtain neurophysicological data during experimentation to

. ~ Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020~

AS 18

Approved For Releasg_.2.QQ.Ql0.8..l10_; __ ,CJA-RDP96.::0.0Z.8.ZROOO.t00020001-0 CL,~.S:3J FfCAT!O~;

-------- ___________ .. ______ .......... T- ......... _____ ..... --.. ------- ;

.. __ ._,_. ___ ~---"-~---~ -~M-- -- --- - - - ... -------~- -~-1--- ---,~- ""> --~--~ - '' -~-oo., .. --,-,.-"'"_1 l

determine those correlates, if any, which relate to paranormal activity.

In the following paragraphs, each of these items is considered in turn

and the progress to date reported. The milestone chart for the basic re~

search program is shown in Table 1. The work is progressing in accordance

i with the schedule prepared for this program, and the remaining time and

funds are sufficient to meet all program objectives.

1. Criteria for the Determination of Gifted Individuals

One of the key issues in the program is the establishll\etnt of

. criteria capable of differentiating individuals apparently gifted in

paranormal functioning from those who are not.

Three experimental paradigms were chosen to act as screening

tests on the basis that these tests had been useful for such purposes

prior to this program ( in the sense that certain apparently gifted . I

. ~ \_

individuals did exceecfingly well on at least one of the tests, w:tereas

the results of unselected volunteers did not differ significantly from

chance expectation). The tests are (a) remote viewing of natural targets, ;. t :.,

(b) reproduction of simple line drawings hidden from the subject but viewed

by an experimenter, and (c) determination of the state of a four-state elec-

tronic random stimulus generator.

The first test constitutes a so-called "free-response" paradigm

in which the subject originates freely about contents of his awareness;

furthermore, the channel in general may involve both direct perception

of the remote site and perception of the mental contents of an observer

:,L;..\SS:FiC:.'\ liON Approved For Release""2UOUJ08J10-:cr.n::.:R:OJ?96~oo781R6oo1ooo2ooo1-0

i

!

__ ] __ 1

0 I

.....

0 0 0 N 0 0 0 .....

0 0

~ """ co

""" 0 0 I

CD en a.. 0 0:::

I

(/) ctl Q>.

~ lo.. 0

LL "C a> > e a. c.

> e c. c.

I

Approved For Release_ 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

at the site. The second test is more constrained than the first in that

the target information is more analytical or abstract, being associated

with a graphical representation of an item of interest rather than the

item itself. The third test is the m~st Icons trained in that the target I

is blind to all participants in the expe.ri men t and the subject's choice

is precisely constrained. The details of these tests are given below.

For the purpose of screening the criteria as to what constitutes

a paranormal result was chosen arbitrarily, viz:

For the purpose of screening a result is to

be considered paranormal if. the a priori

probability for the occurrence of the result

by chance, under the null hypothesis, is

-6 p .(10

Although the above requirement is exceedingly strict by usual psycho-

physiological standards, it is chosen here (a) because the controversial

nature of the subject requires strict handling, and (b) in our work and

elsewhere, a bimodal distribution has been observed empirically in which

a subset of individuals participating in paranormal research produce re-

sults at a level of statistical significance p ~ -6 10 in comparison

with the bulk of individuals who cluster about the mean as expected.

Therefore, we base our criteria on an observable natural division into

clearly functional and non-functional categories.


AS 18

~pproved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 J ~1,i;'!J_.JJ f~:r~~

If/ Six subjects have been chosen for the study to date, subjects l -3

* considered gifted, subjects 4 - 6 acting as learners or controls. -- ...-

Subject 1 qualifies as a gifted subject on the basis of remote viewing~

subject 2 qualifies as gifted on the basis of the random generator test;

subject 3 is tentatively classed as gifted in remote viewing, although

not yet completing the screening series, based on client evaluat :ion of

highly successful remote-viewing experiments carried out for the client // //

in the previous program, and also on the basis of meeting the P< 10 -6

criterion in experimentation at another laboratory.

Subject 5 (learner/control), a male, age 54, is paired with gifted

subject 1, a male, age 55. Learner/control subject 6, a female, age 34, is

'

i.:

/ ' ?;

by age, background, and temperament paired with gifted subject 2, a male, age ~~ -.-- !

31. Learner subject 4 (female, age 53) and gifted subject 3 ( male, age 41)

are paired on the.basis of artistic occupations (professional photographer ";iJJII:."

and painter, respectively) and similar emotional and psychological makeup.

* Earlinr in the program nine subjects were to be placed in three categories,

three subjects each; gifted subjects, learners, and controls. However, I

experience in the early part of the program indicated that (a) a best effort

.J would require spending more time with fewer people, and {b) the distinction between learners and controls 'vas arbitrary in comparison with the distinction !

between these categories and that of gifted subjects as defined above.


..

(

C

(

RS 18


(a) Remote Viewing of Natural Targets

The first screening test is based on previous SRI research

results which indicate that it is possible for a subject to describe

randomly-chosen geographical sites located several miles from the subject r s

position and demarcated by some appropriate means.

This experiment consists of a series of double~blind tests

involving local targets in the San Francisco Bay area which can be docu-

mented by independent judging. Target locations within thirty minutes

driving time from SRI are randomly chosen from a list of targets k~pt ~ ~1 ::.J;~ ~ blind to subject and experimenters and used without replacement. ~ ~--- A. ;;J.t a ifl.tl

'

To begin an experiment, an experimenter is closeted with

subject at SRI to wait 30 minutes to begin a narrative description of

the remote location. A second experimenter obtains a target location

from the target pool and proceeds directly to the target without communi-

eating with :,the subject or experimenter remaining behind. The second

experimenter remains at the target site for an agreed-upon thirty-minute

period following the thirty minutes allotted for travel. During the

observation period, the remote vie\~ng subject is asked to describe his

impressions of the target site into a tape recorder. A comparison is

made when the experimenter returns.

Following a series of nine experiments, the results are sub-

jected to independent judging on a blind basis by five SRI scientists

not otherwise associated with the research. The judges a:re asked to blind

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA.;.RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0

RS 1


match locations, independently visited, against typed manuscripts of

tape-recorded narratives of the remote viewer. A given narrative can

be assigned to more than one target location. A correct match requires

that a transcript of a given date be associated with the target of that

date. Probability calculations are on the basis of the~ priori proba-

------bility of the obtained series of matches by chance, conservatively assuming - ~ ... ,.._,.

)

-:pi~-J:l 10 .,.JJJll ~ n: /J

assignment without replacement on the part of the judges.

As indicated in Report # 1 Subject 1 has completed

this series, obtaining a result significant at the p ;:;: 8 x 10 level. ~.,-~ ~ ~- )1111+. ~/

Experimentation is in progress with Subjects 2 and 4, two transcripts ~ ~-

having been obtained from each to date. (b) Line Drawings

A pool of fifty si~ple line.drawings of everyday objects has

been drawn, randomized, and placed in a secure location.

During experimentation, experimenters and subject are separated

by either an experimenter or subject entering a shielded room so>that

from that time forward th~ subject is at all times visually, acoustically,

and electrically shielded from personnel and material at the target

location.

Follo\rlng isolation a target is chosen by means of the universal

randomization protocol technique described in Section 4(a), used in this

case to generate a two-digit number modulo 50. The subject's task is

then to reproduce with pen on paper the line drawing now displayed at

the ::~r::;:~t location.



Following a period of effort not to exceed half an hour, the

subject may either pass (when he does not feel confident) or indicate

he is ready to subwi t a drawing to the experimenters, in which case the

drawing is collected by an experimenter before the subject is permitted

to see the target. The experiment is then repeated with replacement

until ten drawings have been obtained from the subject.

To obtain an independent evaluation of the correlation between

target and response data, the experimenters submit the data for judging

on a blind basis by two SRI scientists not otherwise associated with the

research. The judges are asked to match the response data with the

corresponding target data (without replacement).

Such experimentation is presently in prograss, a number of

------drawings having been obtained from several of the subjects but not yet --. ..

sub~~tted for judging.



(c) Four-State Electronic Random Stimulus Generator

The determination of the state of a four-state electronic

random stimulus generator comprises the third screening test. The target

is in the form of one of four art slides chosen randomly (p ~ !> by an electronic random generator. The generator does not indicate its choice

until the subject indicates his choice to the machine by pressing a button

(See Figure 8 ) . As soon as the subject indicates his choice, the

target slide is illuminated to provide visual and auditory (bell if correct) I. ,, \ -\

feedback as to the correctness or incorrectness of his choice. Until

that time both subject and experimenter remain ignorant of the machine's

choice, so the experiment is of the double-blind type. Five legends at

the tor: :of the machine face are illuminated one at a time with increasing

correct choices (6,8, 10, .. ) to provide additional reinforcement. The

machine choice, subject.choice),cumulative trial number, and cumulative

hit number are recorded automatically on a printer. Following trial number

25, the machine must be reset manually by depressing a RESET button.

A methodological feature of the machine is that the choice of

a target is not forced. That is, a subject may press a PASS button when t\ i. ' he wishes not to guess, in which case the machine indicates what. its r-!

choice was, and neither a hit nor a trial is scored by the machine, which

then goes on to make its next selection. Thus the subject does not have

to guess at targets when he does not :feel that he has an idea as to which

to choose.



Figure a. ESP Teaching Machine used in this experiment. An incorrect choice of target is indicated. Two of the five "encouragement lights" at the top of the machine are illuminated. The printer to the right of the machine records data on fan-fold paper tape.



Under the null hypothesis of random binomial choices with probability

!. and no learning, the probability of observing ~k successes inn trials

is approximated by the probability of a normal distribution value

For the purpose of screening, each subject is required to complete

100 25-trial runs (i.e., a total of 2500 trials). To date subjecte 1,

2, and 6 have completed this phase of the screening program, and their

results are tabulated in Table 2. Subject 4 has completed 2100 trials with

mean scores of 25.71 (p::::: 0.20).

Table 2

Screening Data: Four-state Electronic Rand Stimulus Generator

Subject fF'..... .1 Mean Score/100 Trials Binomial Probability Over 2500 Trials

1 25.76 0.22 --- ' ~L(o -7 2 3 X 10

6 25.40 0.33

On the basis of this test Subject 2. whose scores are plotted in Fig.

9, qualities as a gifted individual, having satisfied the criterion of

producing a result whose:~ priori probability under the null hypothesis is

-6 p


0

J:.i

"' Ill ..-1 til

1'"1 J:.i +'

0 0 r-1

'H 0 +' :;:l 0

50

.40

30

10

0

0 10 20

RUN NUThiDER - 100 Trials/Run

p = ! per trial

FIGURE 9 DATA SUMMARY FOR SUBJECT 2

30


'-".


2. Identification of Measurable Characteristics Possessed by

Gifted Subjects (20%).

a) Medical Evaluation

The medical evaluation of program participants has been

assigned to the Palo Alto Medical Clinic. Coordination of the program

is being handled by Dr. Robert Armbruster, Director of the Clinic~s

Department of Environmental Medicine. The Clinic, in turn, has subcontracted

certain special tests to the Stanford Medical Center, Stanford University.

One visual sensitivity test is being administered by the Bioengineering

Group of the Electronics and Bioengineering Laboratory of SRI.

The testing procedures, outlined in 'R'able 3 fall into seven categories: . J

1) General physical examination, including complete medical

and family history;

2) Laboratory examinations, including SMA-12 panel blood

chemistries, protein electrophoresis, blood lipid profile,

urinalyses, serology, blood type and factor, pulmonary

function screening, and 12-lead electrocardiogram;

3) Neurological examination, including comprehensive and

electroencephalogram (sleeping and routine);

4) Audiometric examination, including comprehensive, Bekesy

bone conduction, ~:~peech discrimination, and impedance

bridge test;


"y '1,> 1),) \);. ~

00000000 00 00 0 01 oo 00 00 00 00 00 00 ''6~10 oo 0 00 0 00 00 Tt 0 I 0 0 -0 0 N a> 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 i'/'7~ a>

rt. 00 00 00 00 0 00 00 #85 0 "C a> > 0 lo.. c. c.

. I O -~ ~-Comple~ed


5) Opthalmologist examination, including comprehensive, card

testing, peripheral field test, muscle test, dilation

funduscope, and indirect opthalmoscopic and fundus examin-

ation;

6) SpeQial visual examinations, including electroretinogram,

dark adaptation test, and visual contrast sensitivity;

7) EMI Brain scan.

As indicated in Table 3, medical testing is currently in progress.

To date the return information is sparse, having to be collated from

several clinics before a complete analysis can be completed. To provide

an indication of the type of raw data that is to be collated, a small

sample of data obtained on Subject 1 is presented in Appendix 3. As

indicated, the El'vll computerized brain scan reveals a slight enlargement of -

the entire right lateral ventricle, while the left appears normal in size.

An asymmetry in alpha development between left and right hemispheres is

also indicated. Also noted is some concern about the EKG suggesting a

coronary artery problem. The significance of these factors for our interest

will be developed under the direction of Dr. Armbruster and made available

to the client as available.


. '

Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 .' /.i; ' tcr::,

b) Psychological Evaluation

The psychological evaluation of program participants

of both baseline personality evaluation, and of ongoing testing associated

with daily experimentation. The collection of baseline data:(e.g., in-

depth interview, W.A.I.S., etc.) is for the purpose of identifying base-

line characteristics possessed by gifted subjects. The ongoing testing

associated with daily experimentation. (e.g . , Mood Adjective Checklists)

is for the purpose of identifying psychological correlates of successful

versus unsuccessful performance tasks.

1) Baseline Data

The bulk of the baseline evaluation has been assigned to the

Palo Alto Medical Clinic~ Coordination of the program is being handled by

Dr. J.E. Heenan, Chief Clinical Psychologist of the Department of Psychiatry. r The baseline evaluation, outlined in Table 4, consists of

(1) In depth interviews, including objective events and subjective

views relating to the discovery and enhancement of paranormal

capacities; socio-economic, cultural, familial, religious

environment; outstanding peaks, traumas; values, motivation,

interpersonal style;

(2) Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (W.A.I.S~); . 1

(3) Minnesota Multiphase Personality Inventory (M.M.P.I.) \'



2) Cognitive Style Preference Test

In connection with testing hypotheses associated with hemispheric

speciali.zat:l.on of the brain, Dr. Robert Ornstein of the Langley Porter

Neuropsychiatric Institute, University of California, San Francisco, has

been brought into the program as a consultant.

In his capacity as consultant, Dr. Ornstein has provided an instru-

ment named the Cognitive Style Preference Test.. This test was developed

for use in differentiating between individuals preferring a gestait-

/ oriented cognitive style as compared with a verbally-oriented cognitive

style. For the purpose of the program this instrument is administered

to determine whether individuals exhibtting paranormal functioning prefer,

as a g:roup, one style of cognitive functioning predominantly as compared

with individuals in a control group. The test is administered once to

each individual. A sample of the test is included below.

Preliminary results indicate some preference for a verbally-oriented f\. cognitive style on the part of good subjects (Figure 10), but further

data is required\before any significance is to be attached to the results

tabulated thus far.

Should a correlation of test results with paranormal functioning be

found, it would be appropriate in later work to determine whether this

test instrument would be useful as a screening device, i.e., determine

whether other individuals sharing the profile also exhibit paranormal

functioning.



-~-

50 !-

tr.l 40 -Q)

0 --~

-r--Q) f..! Q) 30 .. 'H Q)

--f..!

P-1 H 20 ~ til ~ .0 f..! Q) ?: 10

---.

0 ~ ' 0

10 1-

tr.l _...._

Q) 20 ... --0 ~ Q) f..! _...._ ~ :w ...

~ P-1 .p

i-r-1 40 _..._ til +' tr.l Q) t!:l 50 1-'

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 "= .... tl ._ ........ , -.......---. :z;

Gifted Subjects Learners/Controls Experimenters

FIGURE 10 SUMMARY ON COGNITIVE STYLE PREFERENCE


,

Please do not turn over the pages until I ask you to do so. On each

page of this booklet there are sets of three items arranged in rows. ~vo

of them are alike or fit together in some way. Your task is to select

which one is different and doesn't belong with the other two. The two

columns on the first page are samples. There are three designs or shapes

in each row. Each design has a word printed on it. In the first row of

the first column all the words are the same. Most people would say that

the first and second shapes go together and the third one doesn't belong.

Would you agree? (If not, explain.) Mark the third one with an X then. In the second row most people would say that the first one is different

and the last two go together. Do you agree? Then mark the first.one

with an X.

In the third row the shapes are all the same, but the words HORSE

and SADDLE go together and the world FAULT doesn't belong. Do you agree?

(If not, explain.) Mark the third one with an X. Which would you pick as the odd one in the 4th row? [Color (2nd

one)] In the 5th row you could choose either a word that doesn't belong

or a shape that doesn 1 t be long. Which is the odd word? (TROUT.) Which is the odd shape? [the CIRCLE (DIME)] Either one of these ans\vers is right. Mark either one of them.

The last row also has two possible right answers. Which is the odd

word? (SHIRT.) Which is the odd shape? [The second one (DOG)] Mark either one of them with an X.

On some of these sets people find it easier or more natural to pick

out the odd word, and one some they find it easier to pick out the odd

shape. Either way is correct. We want you to make your selections

whichever way seems most comfortable and natural to you. Matrk only once

in each row, and go as fast as y~u can. Any questions so far?


' ll

- {


The second column has more samples. When I say begin, please maxk

an odd member in each row, and say "STOP" as soon as you finish this

sample column. BEGIN.

(Check forced choices--) Any questions? Then when I say "BEGIN" turn over the next page.

Work as fast as you can, and continue until you.have finished the booklet,

then say "STOP". Ready? BEGIN.


Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0 ,.J -

~ ~ 00 0oo 0 0 o0 0 OcQinl calm Oco.lm 0 0 e ~ ~ 00 00 00 becovse 0 0 door 0 0 wndowo 0 0 00 00 0 ~ 12> ~ ~ @ t; e, Ge BE} tB a

Jtrout I lmckel I 8 EJ El EJ ({ EJ 8 88 a


' ..


~ ~c:!) ~ ~ & ~ ~ 8

~I -l @~

e ~ ~ ~~ 8 8

.

~~f' ) -~ (ld

~ 0~ E1 E; ~ 8~~

~~b) Efl~@

e e e roBr50


Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0 ,J ,.1

GJ G ~ b f;> fo> (~@ ~ ~ $ (!f)

~~ e e B 8 ~ 8 8 ~ EJ @ 0

~ B ~ [2:] ~ 8 G!2 E;Y ~ C9 e E) &J 8 9 .:. noppy 00 &;;) (5)

I I

@ @

-.,

,J ...


~e~ GD8)~

~ 'W ~ ~E)~

~E> ~ B

F~~ ~-~co

~~0

~ 23.~

~ @)> a'b [i_ gD c

8 ~ 8

8QQ rue~


( I

. '


3) Midtesting (SRI-administered)

Ongoing testing associated with daily experimentation is carried

out to provide indicators as to the effects of mood and conceptualization

on success in experimentation. Conclusions will be drmvn in the final stage

of project effort.

Test: Mood Adjective Checklist Source: Psychology Department, Stanford University (Hypnosis Lab) Purpose: The Mood Adjective Checklist is one of a number of pre-experiment

instruments designed to provide a measure of a subject's feelings of the moment as he enters the experimental situation. The purpose is to determine whether measures of success in the experimental phase correlate with pre-experiment mood indicators.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001_0

..

Approved For Release 2000/0~/1 0 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0 MOOD ADJECTIVE CHECKLIST

Each of the words in the followin?, li~Slt describes feeli.nps or mood. Please use the Hst to describe your feelin-:>s at this moment. lfark. each Hard accordint'! to these instructions:

If the ~.Jord definitely describes hoP you feel at the moment you read it, circle the double check nrv) to the rid1t of the ~-lord. For exanmle, if the Hord is calm an0. you are definitely feelinp. calm at the r.tom.ent, c:trcle the double chec1~ as follm.Js:

calm ----

'vv . \ . ....

v ? no (This means you definitely feel calm at this mo~ent.)

If the ,.rord only sB.ghtly applies to your feelings at the morr1ent, circle the sinp;le checl:. as follmvs:

calm vv 7 no (This means you feel slip.htly calm at this tnoment.)

If the word is not clear to you or if you cannot decide Hhether or not it describes your feelings, circle the question mark as folloHs:

calm vv v no (This mea~s you cannot decide ~h.ether you are calm or not.)

If you clearly decide that the Hard does not anply to your feelin.o-s at this moment, circle the no as follows:

calm vv v 7 (This means you are sure vou are not calm at this moment.

Hork rapidly. Your first reaction is best. Hark dmm the first column before going to the next. Please mark all the Hords. This should take only a fetV" minutes.


I ,,


angry vv v ? no energetic vv

concentratin2 vv v ? no playful vv

d:rm-1sy vv v ? no suspicious vv

affectionate vv v 7 no startled vv

apprehensive vv v ? no relaxed vv

hlue Vv v ? no defiant vv

boastful vv v 7 no enr-arr.ed in thought vv

elated vv v ? no

active vv v ? no 'Pleased vv

nonchalant vv v ? no tired vv

skeptical vv v ? no fearful vv

shocked vv v ? no ren-retful vv

calm vv v ? no egotistic vv

bold vv v ? no overjoyed vv earnest vv v ? no vj.~orous vv

sluggi.sh vv v ? no \dtty vv

forgivin?' vv v ? no serene VI!

clutched up vv v ?. no rebellious vv

lonely vv v 7 no seri.ous vv

cocky vv v ? no Harmhearted vv

lip;hthearted vv . ? no insecure vv

quiet vv v 7 no self-centered vv

still vv


v ? no

v ? no

v 7 no

v ? no

v 7 no

v ? no

v ? no

v ? no

v ? no

v ? no

v ? no

v ? no

v ? no

v ? no

v ? no

v 7 no

v ? no

v 7 no

v ? no

v ? no

v ? no

v ? no


Test: Semantic Differential Checklist Source: SRI Urban and Social Systems Division Purpose: The Semantic Differential Checklist is one of a number of pre-

experiment instruments designed to provide a measure of subject conceptualization about an experiment in which he is about to participate. The purpose is to determine whether measures of success in the experiment correlate with pre-experiment conceptualization.


Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96.-00787R0001 00020001-0

Semantic Differential Checklist

The purpose of this rating sheet is to obtain your candid reactions regarding the conditions surrounding the experiment.

For each numbered item you will find a concept to be judged. You are to rate each in order.

This is how yo"u are to use the scales: If you feel .that the concept is highly or closely related to one end of the scale, you should place your checkmark as follows;

impractical impractical

practical practical

If your feelings on the concept are neutral, place your checkmark in the middle space, etc.

Work at fairly high speed thr~ugh this rating sheet. Do not puzzle over individual items. Give your first impressions, your immediate feelings about each item.

Conditions surrounding experiment

1. good bad

2. unfriendly friendly

.3. stimulating dull

4. positive negative

5. unhelpful helpful

6. right wrong

7. uninteresting interesting

8. unorganized organized



9. satisfying - --

disappointing

10. unprepared prepared

My involve~e~t in experiment

l. good bad

2. useless valuable

3. stimulating dull

4. positive . negative

5 . passive active

6. capable incapable

7. important unimportant

8. unsuccessful successful

9. prepared unprepared

10. impractical practical


' '

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001 o TABLE 4 -

.PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION Personnel #1 - 3, subjects;

#4 - 6 learners/controls; #7 - 8, experimenters.

:I()O eoooo oo #4 :(J 0 0 0 0 0 @ -

#5 lo 0 o 0 o 0 o0 o0 o0 o0 1o 0 o0 o0 #6 J~0e01o 0o 0 o0 o010 o 0e 01e

SRI E.:) Palo Alto Medical Clinic Client Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0 <

(4) Benton Visual Memory Test and Wechsler Memory Scale;

(5) Thematic Apperception Test (T.A.T.)

and Rorschach projective tests

(6) Bender Gestalt Test,

(7) Luscher color test

(8) Strong Aptitude/Values Test (9) Cognitive Style Preference Test

As indicated in Table 4, the psychological testing is well underway.

There is, of course, a considerable lag between testing and results. To

date, only a partial analysis of data from Subject 1 is available. We

present this data in Appendix 4 as a sample of the type of analysis that

will become available. We note in passing that the data on Subject 1

from the WoAoi.S. appears to correlate with that obtained from the

* client-administered W.A.I.S., an indication of the uniformity of results

available from such testing.

* Private communication.



(c) Neurop~ychological Evaluation

In addition to the measurement of the physiological components

of the neurological system covered in the medical evaluation, a neuro-

psychological profile is being obtained by the administration of the

I

Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychology Test Battery, which includes the Category

Recognition Test, ';Pactual Performance Test,, Halstead-Wepman Aphasia

Screening Test, and other appropriate measures. This phase of the

program is being handled by Dr. Donald Lim of the Palo Alto Veterant's

Administration Hospital, who has personally consulted with Dr. Reitan

on testing procedures and interpretation. The neuropsychological evaluation

program is scheduled for the first half of September.



3. Identification of Neurophysiological Correlates Which R~late to

Paranormal Activities

High on the list of priorities for the program is the identification

of neurophysiological correlates accompanying paranormal activity. The

purpose of this part of the study is twofold: (a) to obtain information

about the neurophysiological state associated with paranormal activity j

in general, and (b) to obtain indicators which differentiate between

correct and incorrect responses to a parano~mally applied stimulus, so

that an independently-determined bias factor can be applied during the

generation of data by the subject.

Two facilities are in use for the purposes described above. One

is a standard EEG facility under the direction of Dr. Jerry Lukas,

head of SRI's Sleep Studies program. This facility consists of two

sound-isolated rooms with appropriate signal lead connections, an

eight-channel polygraph for visual recording, and a magnetic tape/

computer processing/ printer readout which provides on-line processing,

of the polygraph data. In our ,con~iguration we obtain a hardcopy

printout of 5-second averages of eight channels of polygraph information

fifteen minutes following a :!fifteen minute run. At present we monitor

broadha. alpha (7~14 Hz) and beta (14-34 Hz) brainwave components from

the left and right occipital regions, galvanic skin response, and two

channels of plethysmograph data (blood volume and pulse height).


Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0 The second faci'lity is a smaller semi-portable four-channel polygraph

with a GSH. channel, reflected-light plethysmograph indicating blood volume/

pulse height, one channel of unfiltered EEG activity, and a fourth EEG

channel with zero-crossing digital filtering. The latter permits

percent-time measurements in any band, with upper and lower band edge

settings in 1Hz increments.

Considerable data has been obtained with both facilities. The- bttlk

----~-----------of the data awaits further analysis which will occur at completion of

various series:underway. However, several results have been obtained ~-

which we describe below.

(a) Bilateral EEG Measurements -- Remote Strobe ExpeTiment

As discussed in Report #2, a variety of evidence from clinical and

neurosurgical sources indicates that the two hemispheres of the human

brain are specialized for different cognitive functions. The left ~

hemisphere is predominantly involved in~d other analytic functioning, the.r~ in spatial and othe~_processing.

In consultation with Dr. Robert Ornstein of the Langley Porter

Neuropsychiatric Institute, an hypothesis was formed based on certain -:=-=:-

observed characteristics that paranormal functioning might involve

------right hemispheric specialization. To test this hypothesis, the EEG ,..-. - ,..--

remote strobeflash experiment, discussed in the original proposal and in

the paper attached to Report #1, was repeated with Subject 4 three times

in the sleep lab under the direction of Dr. Lukas with monitoring of

right and left occipital regions. Each experiment consisted of twenty -

15-second trials, with ten no-flash trials, and ten 16-Hz trials randomly

inter'llixcd. Reduction of alpha activity (arousal response) correlated Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0

"""--- ~ ... - ..

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0 with remote stimuli was~rved as in prev~ous ex~er~ments, but essentially

on~1 the right hemisphere (average alpha reduction 16 percent in right ,1 #1-

hemisphere, 2 percent in left, during the 16-Hz: trials as compared wit~ ~_:-1

'

the no--flash trials). The trial-to-trial variation is larger than in ""' rJJI"';; qj~ previous work, however, due to use of a wider-band filter for the alpha ?

~~ band, and therefore the system is being modified before further work.,... . ~ plj?

(b). Physiological Correlates of Remo~e Viewing, _,A,4 ..--, -/,m~: _{/wl~. In this series of experiments a subject takes part in a remote

viewing protocol as described in Section A.l. (c) (Remote Viewing with

Feedback):.- In this case, however 7 the subject is connected to the -

physiological recording instruments of the smaller semi-portable

:four-channel polygraph des~ribed above. ~~~==~=---~====~

Baseline and experimental

measures of the following observables are made: 1) Galvanic skin response

(GSR) is recorded using finger electrodes taped in place on second and

Iourth finger; 2) Blood volume/pulse height is recorded using a

reflected-light plethysmograph; 3) Unfiltered EEG is recorded from the

right occipital region; 4) Percent-time in alpha (8-12 Hz) is recorded

on the fourth channel. The alpha filter is a sharp cut-off digital type

with essentially zero-pass outside the prescribed bandpass limits.

During the course of an experiment the subject is asked to describe

his perceptions as to the nature of the remote target. His comments are

tape rc~co.rded and noted on the polygraph, a,long with the time. A

correlation is then attempted between those descriptions which are found

to be uniquely correct and accurate, and the corresponding sections of

polygraph recording.

ll<

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0 --~

~~5?/ALJ: h~~A4'/te~.:; Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-0078ZQQQ()>t~f(~hhe /~t:tff..h.<

. ~?( In our investigations to date we have not found a strong correlation

-..... _

between the observed physiological states 'and the subjects' descriptions.

Of the correlates being monitored, the one which seems the most promising .) .~. is the unfiltered EEG. In our preliminary analysis of the data it appears ~.

that there is often an overall reduction in EEG power in the twenty-second t;"'~~ IJffi?

period just before a subject renders a correct description. Subsequent ,- . ._~ .. ,_ . .- ---- -~

to this observation, we have learned that Janet Mitchell at the American

Society for Psychical Research,made similar observations in her work with

Subject 3 (Swann), also in remote viewing experiments. A sample chart

record is shown in Figure 11. (Time runs from right to left.)

The traces, top to bottom, are the unfiltered EEG, blood volume/pulse

height, GSR, and filtered (alpha) EEG. Protocol, verbal description, and

photograph of the location accompanying this chart are given in Section

A. 1. (c).

Seven experiments of this type have been completed as a pilot study.

Upon completion of the analysis of this data, any findings will be I tested under rigorous no-feedback conditions.

4. Identification of the Nature of Paranormal Phenomena and Energy (10%)

This portion of the program, is devoted to efforts to understand the

nature and scope of paranormal phenomena, including investigation of the

physical and psychological laws underlying the phenomena, determination

of the manner and degree to which known processes are mediated by little

understood or undiscovered mechanisms or energies, definition of the

prrcise nature of the .channels involved, etc.

At this point in the effort :three "psychokinetic11 tasks have been

I I .I I I i I 1 I I I - I I I I -~- I I I I i I I I I i I I I I I I. I I I I I 1- I I I I I I I I I I I I

-:- ::_-: :~ : -~ :: _,~~ .;: .~ ~=:- ~ ~~ c: ::: ~= ::: -=::: :~ ~-'?~ .: ~: .-: .::: .- =~~ ;_-: _: :=. ::: ~ =:: _::: :~ c: 7:_: ;:: ;:.:: ::::: =j: -~~ .:~- .L ~~IL :: .. ~ -:~ ::

~:~:'~::~~ ;;::~::~~~:;~k~~~iw~.~,~,, ~~~r~ ~~:; ~~;-~~~;~ -~!:;~~~~~~~~:~!~~:~~~~~:::~~~ ~;:~; ::r~~:~!:;~:~t-~~~:~.rf*~2~~~~;;~~~~;,~7;;!~;~; ~ . II .I .. - - . . . . . - .. i .. .. -. - 'i . .. _. . -- . I' .. ! . _, " - - I - - I - . .. .. . I j. I I t I i I

- -- - --: :- .-- - .:: ::: :==. :: ::~t::"- C: :.; ~~ :~1::: :~ ;~ r:: ::.:b - ::: ~ :- r:::: --1=-== :~: ::~-~ ':_: = -=::>= ~ ~: ~ ~~ -~ nt . : -. _:jj ~ f cj -- .. ::_ -~ :-._ :. :: ~ .; ~~ :;. :~ :.~. ~~: ~: .::: :::: .~ c: .~ ;_ :; .~. -;:- ; ~ :::.: : ~~J~- ::~ r.::: = == := = ~ :_:- ~; ~-: ::- :_. :~ ~ .-1~ : I I :

:_: _; _=_ -~ ~ .; . =:t~:- :== ~: :=. =~ ::: ~: .~: ~:~:-~. ~;~ _. F=- ~:= '= -~ -:,_:~ :~:;: ~- :::1-::.: :::-: :c-r~ -~~ -j ~~= ~ ::: ::=: -~ ~ : ~-l-~ ~~ :;:r: :~ : : 1 .. :. .=:: :::~ ~ -~: :: :~- :~ ::: =- ~=::- -= =::- =:~~; =f--: --=-:-::.-: ~~:: == = == .'=: ~~r::~ :.~ =t=-jj= ~~'i-='=' :::- -~ ~ =::& ~~ :::: = =::t02l.::.:L ~L I :: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I

I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I II I I It I I I I I I I I I I l

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I

-l-1~:::...-J.---+-..._-1~-++-H~-++-H-++. -+J_.._:P.-+-+-'-+~"-:~t--.---1:-+- - := ': - . -=- == --- - .:: : -l~ : --- ! .. ! LL 1.. -- 1--=, -+---f--+-+-~rl--+-+-t-1-'::--t:-+-+:::+--~~r-. t:-:;c_+--+-+==----f-+-~r---+--== 1 l L l ! J:c . I" t+ -f---t-+-f-f---+-+---t-+-f--1'--!----1----j-+- r-r-l-:' - - -- .l -. : fTI


(a) Universal Randomization Protocol

It was deemed desirable in our work to establish a universal randomi-

zation protocol independent of the particular experiment under consideration.

The only exceptions were to be automated experiments where target selection

is determined by radioactive decay or electronic randomization.

The randomization procedure is designed around a ten-unit base, e.g,,

ten targets, ten work periods, etc. A ten-digit sequence governing an

experiment is blind to both experimenter and subject, and is uncovered by

means of the following procedure. A three-page RAND Table of Random Digits

(Table 5,) is entered to obtain the ten-digit sequence, the entrance point

being determined by four throws of a die,t the first 1, 2, or 3 determining

page, tl~ next 1, 2, 3, or 4 determining column block, and the final throw

determining from which of the first six rows in the block the ten-digit

sequence is to be taken. An opaque card with a single-digit window is

then moved across the row to uncover digits one at a time. If a multiplicity

of targets exist, the digits 0 through 9 are employed directly. If a binary

command is required (e.g., increase/decrease or activity/no activity) the

parity of the digit (even or odd) is employed.

t A technique found in control runs to produce a distribution of die faces

differing nonsignificantly from chance expectation.


Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0 ''

TABLE 5 CPYRGHT

Table of Random Digits*

11 16 43 63 18 75 06 13 76 74 40 60 31 61 52 83 23 53 73 61 21 21 59 17 91 76 83 15 86 78 40 94 15 35 85 69 95 86 09 16 10 43 84 44 82 66 55 83 76 49 73 50 58 34 72 55 95 31 79 57 36 79 22 62 36 33 26 66 65 83 39 41 21 60 13

11 44 28 93 20 73 94 40 47 73 12 03 25 14 14 57 99 47 67 48 54 62 74 85 11 49 56 31 28 72 14 06 39 31 04 61 83 45 91 99 15 46 98 22 85 64 20 84 82 37 41 70 17 31 17 91 40 27 72 27 79 51 62 10 07 51 48 67 28 75 38 60 52 93 41 58 29 98 38 80

20 12 51 07 94 99 75 62 63 60 64 51 61 79 71 40 68 49 99 48

33 88 07 64 13 71 32 55 52 17 13 01 57 29 07 75 97 86 42 98 08 07 46 20 55

65 28 59 71 98 12 13 85 30 10 34 55 63 98 61 88 26 77 60 68 17 26 45 73 27 38 22 42 93 01 65 99 OS 70 48 25 06 77 75 71 95 63 99 97 54 31 19 99 25 58 16 38 11 50 69 25 41 68 78 75 61 55 57 64 04 86 21 01 18 08 52 45 88 88 80 78 35 26 79 13 78 13 79 87 68 04 68 98 71 30 33 00 78 56 07 92 00 84 48 97 62 49 09 92 15 84 98 72 87 59 38 71 23 15 12 08 58 86 14 90 24 21 66 34 44 21 28 30 70 44 58 72 20 36.78 19 18 66 96 02 16 97 59 54 28 33 22 65 59 03 26 18 86 94 97 51 35 14 77 99 59 13 83 95 42 71 16 85 76 09 12 89 35 40 48 07 25 58 61 49 29 47 85 96 52 so 41 43 19 66 33 18 68 13 46 85 09 53 72 82

96 15 59 so 09 27 42 97 29 18 79 89 32 94 48 88 39 25 42 11 29 62 16 65 83 62 96 61 24 68 48 44 91 51 02 44 12 61 94 38 12 63 97 52 91 71 02 01 72 65 94 20 so 42 59 68 98 35 05 61 14 54 43 71 34 54 71 40 24 01 38 64 80 92 78 81 31 37 74 00

-83 40 38 88 27 09 83 41 13 33 04 29 24 60 28 75 66 62 69 54 67 64 20 52 04 30 69 74 48 06 17 02 64 97 37 85 87 51 21 39 64 04 19 90 11 61 04 02 73 09 48 07 07 68 48 02 53 19 71 37 17 04 89 45 23 97 44 45 99 04 30 15 99 54 so 83 77 84 61 15 93 03 98 94 16 52 79 51 06 31 12 14 89 22 31 31 36 16 06 50 82 24 43 43 92 96 60 71 72 20 73 83 87 70 67 24 86 39 75 76

96 99 05 52 44 70 69 32 52 55 73 54 74 37 59 95 63 23 95 55 09 11 97 48 03 97 30 38 87 01 07 27 79 32 17 79 42 12 17 69 57 66 64 12 04 47 58 97 83 64 65 12 84 83 34 07 49 32 80 98 46 49 26 15 94 26 72 95 82 72 38 71 66 13 80 60 21 20 so 99 08 43 31 91 72 08 32 02 08 39 31 92 17 64 58 73 72 00 86 57 10 01 17 50 04 86 05 44 11 90 57 23 82 74 64 61 48 75 23 29 92 42 06 54 31 16 53 00 55 47 24 21 94 10 90 08 53 16 15 78 35 54 25 58 65 07 30 44 70 10 31 30 94 93 87 02 33 00 24 76 86 59 52 62 47 18 55 22 94 91 20 75 09 70 24 72 61 96 66 28 72 11 53 49 85 58 03 69 91 37 28 53 78 43 95 26 65 43 78 51

Thl! table appear! through the courtesy of The RAND Corporation and the McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. and is reprinted by permission from The Compleat Strategy!t, by J.D. Williams, pp. 219-221 [44].

1


" Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0

CPYRGHT

07 42 85 88 63 96 02 38 89 36 97 92 94 12 20 86 43 19 44 85 35 37 92 79 22 28 90 65 50 13 40 56 83 32 22 40 48 69 11 22 10 98 22 28 07 10 92 02 62 99 41 48 39 29 35 17 06 17 82 52 90 12 73 33 41 77 80 61 24 46 93 04 06 64 76 24 99 04 10 99 63 00 21 29 90 23 51 06 87 74 76 86 93 93 00 84 97 80 75 04 40 77 98 63 82 48 45 46 52 69 02 98 25 79 91 50 76 59 19 30 43 21 61 26 08 18 16 78 46 31 94 47 97 65 00 39 17 00 66 29 96 16 76 43 75 74 10 89 36 43 52 29 17 58 22 95 96 69 09 47 70 97 56 26 93 35 68 47 26 07 03 68 40 36 00 52 83 15 53 81 85 81 26 18 75 23 57 07 57 54 58 93 92 83 66 86 76 56 74 65

37 10 06 24 92 63 64 24 76 38 54 72 35 65 27 53 07 63 82 35 53 40 61 38 55 38 51 92 95 00 84 82 88 12 48 25 54 83 40 75 55 17 28 15 56 18 85 65 90 43 65 79 90 19 14 81 36 30 51 73 40 35 38 48 07 47 76 74 68 90 87 91 73 85 49 48 21 37 17 08 18 89 90 96 12 77 54 15 76 75 26 90 78 81 73 71 18 92 83 71 68 14 12 53 40 92 55 11 13 26 68 OS 26 54 22 88 46 00 63 52 51 55 99 11 59 81 31 06 32 51 42 58 76 81 49 88 14 79 97 00 92 2143 33 86 73 45 97 93 59 97 17 65 54 16 67 64 20 50 51 15 08 95 05 57 33 16 68 70 94 53 29 58 71 33 38 26 49 47 08 96 46 10 06 04 11 12 02 22 54 23 01 19 41 08 29 19 66 51 87

28 17 74 41 11 15 70 57 38 35 75 76 84 95 49 24 54 36 32 85 66 95 34 47 37 81 12 70 74 93 86 66 87 03 41 66 46 07 56 48 19 71 22 72 63 84 57 54 98 20 56 72 71 20 36 50 34 73 35 21 68 75 66 47 57 19 98 79 22 22 27 93 67 80 10 09 61 70 44 08 75 02 26 53 32 98 60 62 94 51 31 99 46 90 72 37 35 49 30 25 11 32 37 00 69 90 26 98 92 66 02 98 59 53 03 15 18 25 01 66 55 20 86 34 70 18 15 82 52 83 89 96 51 02 06 95 83 09 54 06 11 47 40 87 86 OS 59 46 70 45 45 58 72 96 11 98 57 94 24 81 81 42 28 68 42 60 99 71 96 69 01 07 10 85 30 74 30 57 75 09 21 77 17 59 63 23 15 19 02 74 90 20 96 85 21 14 29 33 91 94

42 27 81 21 60 32 57 61 42 78 04 98 26 84 70 27 87 51 54 80 17 69 76 01 14 63 24 73 20 96 19 74 02 46 37 97 37 73 21 12 05 68 63 02 43 34 13 40 29 36 50 19 71 98 69 86 49 76 87 09 52 99 24 66 50 89 91 05 73 95 46 95 46 75 36 28 96 88 19 36 94 51 89 39 84 81 47 86 77 50 82 54 96 26 76 31 12 34 98 99 00 18 47 21 86 78 90 67 54 89 61 79 88 16 00 80 01 88 47 42 87 46 26 31 65 79 81 66 16 30 57 66 62 90 55 46 51 80 14 87 88 69 25 87 16 12 27 34 81 76 29 80 56 49 94 66 87 26 22 30 20 09 44 29 62 41 38 21 67 68 06 71 13 49 39 19 59 97 62 47 60 93 58 15 04 50 52 08 21 53 13 93 44 68 85 58 31 58 83 66

2


AppPOved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0 ..

CPYRGHT

51 39 28 59 36 43 89 85 OS 96 28 54 99 83 27 99 94 32 53 77 54 23 94 19 18 79 52 64 62 74 40 87 16 18 OJ 25 76 75 54 84 57 89 27 33 94 07 16 09 02 62 47 70 4J 8J 55 71 70 88 01 17 02 J3 07 47 36 53 27 44 44 68 62 61 11 96 98 09 30 42 92 65 76 11 52 92 47 55 34 25 12 99 03 04 78 39 81 11 91 60 92 67 63 31 28 18 86 29 08 52 01 01 26 46 05 05 01 31 73 11 89 38 27 63 22 15 70 34 27 45 64 26 01 76 42 59 59 69 29 38 98 75 06 33 56 21 11 44 01 45 25 67 11 76 25 48 06 02 65 15 29 12 64 14 28 76 76 21 35 88 87 73 31 73 63 16 95 11 52 36 42 13 28 43 62 54 68 75 23 57 53 70 97 15 54 87 06 52 23 92 18 31

09 52 28 38 55 85 97 31 58 88 31 18 14 96 72 17 23 70 40 24 93 71 41 54 14 93 71 20 27 42 32 11 58 26 83 67 18 28 90 30 15 68 15 35 99 58 18 57 38 40 07 06 87 59 47 71 74 36 92 85 77 71 22 39 14 08 90 74 37 68 26 62 27 41 84 75 16 69 67 48 78 45 35 48 44 61 50 90 12 45 02 80 55 26 76 22 51 94 78 48 24 86 06 82 84 19 36 72 90 73 32 30 15 87 01 04 19 33 01 42 37 28 40 68 44 78 88 75 72 76 26 33 95 69 09 39 33 14 21 01 35 48 85 24 73 37 63 43 25 69 95 27 40 95 08 81 01 24 24 13 51 59 55 99 09 35 22 34 49 91 24 27 53 96 32 09 77 79 88 00 90 66 OJ 51 71 30 02 19 11 20 36 11 64 21 28 65 40 19 41 99

47 50 50 20 08 20 30 08 71 88 96 19 50 70 59 13 26 63 13 89 13 35 00 84 14 64 04 99 43 77 22 40 89 49 58 19 09 55 80 35 33 00 69 26 90 69 24 89 74 43 53 89 62 35 08 16 22 75 69 29 55 21 66 38 86 06 80 41 18 61 22 56 50 24 75 00 25 87 90 18 21 99 12 62 28 14 80 11 91 92 49 43 82 07 72 60 84 66 97 32 71 02 52 82 12 10 47 42 75 22 65 62 03 46 84 00 21 00 48 63 65 52 21 52 42 84 55 47 45 60 20 24 62 69 41 41 29 80 47 63 27 97 55 49 23 90 65 00 61 70 09 43 30 91 67 35 16 63 27 31 07 30 00 97 04 36 09 96 15 77 95 55 27 34 56 16 57 88 81 40 54 35 71 36 89 19 56 90 38 14 76 05 30 51 50 69 12 56 94 42

00 97 70 44 81 42 04 40 86 49 34 82 23 58 43 78 46 88 23 80 13 92 07 87 61 12 31 19 28 08 07 75 30 40 73 58 52 08 00 22 08 39 53 70 43 37 88 03 41 72 04 20 49 44 34 62 79 88 19 02 46 16 66 72 06 01 61 94 37 69 96 77 01 94 40 29 70 04 20 93 87 76 77 76 07 03 74 20 16 13 65 98 96 28 43 10 91 73 44 58 29 88 09 52 88 21 64 44 65 87 06 64 49 47 84 66 99 56 18 12 36 24 83 66 66 14 89 45 92 73 88 95 04 60 77 34 65 11 20 38 12 38 62 96 56 30 47 42 59 64 21 48 29 54 22 02 00 23 36 71 52 06 87 38 01 52 18 81 94 91 55 13 76 10 39 02 00 66 99 13 41 72 75 21 71 56 71 90 60 54 98 44 18 15 29 59 60 76 52 25

3



(b) Experiments with Develco-Superconducting Differential Magnet-

ometer (Gradiometer)

One of the first psychoenergetically-produced physical effects

observed by SRI personnel in early research (1972) was the apparent

perturbation of a Josephson effect magnetometer. The conditions of that

pilot study, involving a few hours use of an instrument committed to

other research, prevented a proper investigation. The number of data

samples was too few to permit meaningful statistical analysis, and the

lack of readily available multiple recording equipments prevented in-

vestigation of possible "recorder only" effects.

Therefore, at the suggestion of the client, a series of

experiments were carried out using a client-supplied Develco Model

8805 superconducting second-derivative gradiometer manufactured by

Develco, Inc., Mountain View, California. The assembled device is

shown in Figure 12.

Basically, the gradiometer is a four-coil Josephson effect

magnetometer device consisting of a pair of coil pairs wound so as to

provide a series connection of two opposing first-derivative gradiometers,

yielding a second-derivative gradiometer (i.e., a device sensitive only

to second and higher order derivative fields). As a result, the device is

relatively insensitive to uniform fields and to uniform gradients. This

arrangement allows for sensitive measurement of fields from nearby

sources while discriminating against relatively uniform magnetic fields

produced by remote sources. The device is ordinarily



SUPERCONDUCTING DIFFERENTIAL MAGNETOMETER

FIGURE 12 Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0


used to measure magnetic fields originating ~rom processes within the

human body, such as action currents in the heart which produce magneto-

cardiograms. The sensitive tip of the instrument is simply placed near

the body area of interest.

In our application, however, the subject is located at a distance

of four meters from the gradiometer probe. As a result the Subject is

located in a zone of relative insensitivity; e.g., stand~!lg up,_ -~~itting

down, leaning forward, and arm and leg movements produce no signals. "" ------------------- ------------------------

From this location the subject is asked, as a mental task, to affect the

probe. ~rhe results of his efforts are available to him as feedback from

three sources~ an oscilloscope, a panel met-er, and a chart recorder,

the latter providing a permanent record.

After initial difficulty with the instrument due to RF interference

effects, which required modificaton by the manufacturer, the gradiometer

was available for use by the contractor from June 10 to June 21. Some

RF int erlerence e'ffects remained, due in part to environmental proximity

to other instrumentation, but the device was usable nonetheless.

Protocol for subject pa.rticipation was instituted as follows.

The subject removes all metal objects, and the effects of body movements

are checked at the start of each experimental period. The subject then

works with the machine in a learning mode, observing effects being produced,

if any, via feedback from the instrumentation. Once satisfied that a

. possibility exists of prod\:teing effects on command under experimenter


Approved For Releas~ 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0 control, the experimenter announces the start of the experiment. The

universal randomization protocol (discussed in previous section) is then

used to generate ten activity/no activity periods of equal length (e.g.,

twenty-five seconds) pre-determined by the experimenter.

A sample run (Run 1, Subject 1) is shown in Figure 13. The

randomly-generated ON (activity) periods are Nos. 2, 8, and 9. As

obs~rved, signals appear in each of these three periodso The sig,nal

appeauing in period 9 was strong enough to cause loss of continuous / tracking. This latter type of signal can be tne result of an exceptionally ./

/f~ . strong flux change, or an RF burst whether subject-generated or artifactual, P;;. and are handled on the basis of statistical correlation as discussed below. //);~ r.lnA An artifact due to the passage of a truck in the parking lot adjacent to

the laboratory (under continuous surveillance by the experimenter) is

noted in period 6. Each of the signals on scale corresponds to an input

9 2 2 2 1.6 x 10- Gauss/em (second derivative ~B /U ), equivalent to

z z

7 "-' 3.5 X 10"'- Gauss referred to one pickup coil.

The interpretation of such observations must be subjected to careful

analysis. For example, the emphasis on "corresponds to" is based on the

following: although ~he probe is ~signed to register magnetic fields,

and the s.;Lmplest hypothesis is that an observed signal is such, in a

task as potentially complex as "psychokinesis", one must be cautious about

assigntng a given obs.erved effect to a specific cause. Therefore, '.vi thout

multiple measurement employing equally sensitive apparatus, which time and

lack of instrument availability did not permit, one can only conclude

that generation of a magnetic field is the most probable cause. With -

A'pf!S~clt8/i:.hf3-Slg.uBP9EfO 9bserved simultaneously on three 'U TtL \JIA'=R - 0 8/ROOO 10002000'1-0

recording devices, and thus a "recorder only" effect can be considered .,... -_.

fv!r~' # 7 ~~-

Approved Fo 00/0~/1 0 : CIA-RDP9 -00787R0001 00020001-0

END

OFF

.

,_-

OFF

TRUCK

OFF

OFF

OFF

OFF

OFF

FIGURE 13 GRADIOMETER DATA

STAR'r

Approved For Release 2000/0~{10: CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0

.


low probability, although an electronics interference effect ahead of all

display cannot be ruled out. We therefore treat the magnetic cause as

tentative, although most probable, and concentrate our attention on

whether a correl~tion exists between system disturbances and subject

efforts.

Subject 1 logged the most time in controlled runs, thirteen ten-trial

runs. Each of the ten trials in the run lasted fifty seconds each,*

the activity/no activity command for each trial being generated by the

universal randomization protocol technique. In the 13 x 10 = 130 trials,

consisting of a random distri'&ution of 64 activity and 66 no-activity

periods, 63 events of signal-to-noise ratio > 1 were observed. Of these

63 events, 42 were distributed among the activity periods, 21 among the

( 1

no-activity periods, a correlation significant at the p = 0.004 level. _ '. ? Although subject \' ~

efforts and observed pertllrbatio~s sometimes coincided, activity was

Subjects 2 and 6 also interacted with the device.

generally low and did not appear to be a signature of correlated activity

under control. .A controlled ten-trial run with Subject 2 and two such

runs with Subject 6 yielded non-significant results.

Given the limited availability of the instrument and somewhat

noisy environment, from our best effort .we

for Subject 1 the observed number of precisely timed events in pilot

work coupled with the statistically significant (p 0.004) correlation

between subject effort and signal output in controlled runs indicate a

* With the exception of the first run where 25-second trials were used.



highly probable cause-effect relationship. Thus it appears that a gifted

subject can interact with a second derivative magnetic gradiometer of 1 -9 2

sensitivlty,..., 10 Gauss/em from a distance of four meters. Further work

would be required to determine absolutely the precise nature of the

interaction, although given the equipment design the generation of a ( magnetic field is the most probable mechanism.

(c) EePeriments with Laser-Monitored Torsion Pendulum

In this series of experiments we examine the possibility that a subject

may be able to exext a physical influence on a remotely located physical

system. The target is a torsion pendulum suspended by a metal Xiber inside

a sealed glass bell jar. The pendulum consists of three 100 gram balls

arranged symetrically at 120 angles on a 2 em radius. The entire apparatus

is shock mounted, and protected from air currents by the enclosing bell

jar.

The angular .position of the pendulum is measured by means of an

optical readout system. The system consists of a laser beam from a lo.

t power argon laser reflected from a small mirror on the pendulum onto a

tt position sensing silicon detector 1.5 meters from the pendulum. The

detector yields an output voltage proportional to spot position. The

ttt output from the detector is monitored by a chart recorder which provides

a conti.nuous 1 sine wave record of pendulum position.

t /spectra Physics Model 262

tt United Detector 'l'echnology Model SC/10

tti~ Brush Model Mark 200



The system exhibits a sensitivity of approximately 10 microradians.

Under typical experimental conditions random accoustical fluctuations

drive the pendulum in its torsional normal mode of 10 second period to

a level ~ 100 microradians angular deviation. During control runs

the pendulum executes harmonic motion with a maximum variation il.1,

amplitude of 10 percent over an hour period. Sudden vibrational

perturbations in the environment produce oscillation of tlle pendulum

in the vertical plane at a frequency of 1 Hz, as contrasted with the

torsional mode in the horizontal plane at 0.1 Hz.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001_0


The subject is asked, as a mental task, to affect the pendulum motion,

the results of which would be available as feedback from the chart recorder .

The subject is then encouraged to work with the pendulum from a distance

of 1 meter, observing effects being produced. If satisfied that there

is a po~sibility of producing effects (typically following a week's activity,

a couple of hours per day)' an experiment is begun.

As in other experiments, subject efforts to increase or decrease

oscillation amplitude are determined by an experimenter utilizing the uni-

versal randomization protocol described in (a). Each expe~iment lasts one

hour and consists of six 5-minute work periods alternated with six 5-minute (I rest periods.

In later work, the subject is removed to a room 12 meters down the

hall with three intervening office spaces to determine whether effects can II be produced from a remote location. The subject is provided feedback at

the remote location either by closed circuit video or by a second chart

recorder in parallel with the recorder in the enclosed target laboratory.

The remote aspect was instituted both to prevent artifactual effects from

body b.ea t, etc., and also to determine whether energy -can be coupled va

the remote viewing channel to a remote location.-)-

+ Both experimental evidence and theoretical work indicate that distance

may not be a strong factor in paranormal phenomena. See, for example,

E .H. Wall\:er "Properties of Hidden Variables in Quantum Theory: Impli-

cations for Para physics~' 1 U.s. Army Ballistic Research Laboratories ,

Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland.



In pilot studies we observed,:considerable evidence indicating that a

gifted subject located in the same room is able, by concentration, to increase

or decrease pendulum motion on command while sitting quietly one meter from ( the bell jar. The change-to-baseline ratio is often 5:1 or better so the

effects are l}Ot small. A sample chart showing a rest period followed by a

decrease period is given in Figure 14.

Vibrational artifacts can be ruled out on the basis that when such inputs

occur, a marked 1 Hz oscillation signal due to vertical motion is superimposed l/ on the 0.1 Hz torsional motion. What is especially interesting are the Y

decreases which take the motion below that generally observed due to en- ( vironmental noise driving. Such observations indicate the application of

a constraint which couples energy out of the pendulum motion. Similar ob- ---

servations have been observed with the subject removed to the second location

12 meters away. Although less pronounced (change-to~baseline ratios typically

2:1), the effect remains easily observable.

The universal randomization protocol is used throughout to determine

increase/decrease periods. Control run data are being collected to be sub-

jected to the same analysis. Multiple recording is used throughout to rule

out artifacts due to recorder effects. Finally, an electrometer with the

base of the bell jar serving as one electrode. is monitored to record acoustic

vibration independently. Due to the potential significance of such findings,

l\ considerable data is being taken in order that the matter can be subjected to statistical analysis over a large sample involving hundreds of work periods.

A few hundred data samples have already been collected for this purpose, an J . -~ \

the results will b!(/~ublishe.Jl when available. ? ~ < ,4; +iA--M I

Approved For Release 2000/08/10~RDP96-00j8~0,Q0~01-0 .

H m.;t,i~: c:::

j:~ }-j tc:'c:~-c~c:.c~-::c rcr-rtt /-1-i-+ ----

l.r--i ---

'!->

~ .,..;. -~~ ------~--M

----:c-:--

0:i- !t- ', _ _:_:c:-.. ::::::-:;:_

---

:---

----

f:ttlt1--' t+ri-:

!:""' Ill 1-j

crQ !D

Ill a '0 1-' lil"f I-' rt c C4 !D !, ,,, ~

"" Ill H 1-j g ,, .....

I Ill 1:0 rt t:tj ,._,.

0 1-' p ~ () 0 "d 1-j t::j

a 1-j !2: !D g [/) '1:i ~ 0 p C4 (ll :s.:

0 ll rt t-3 -o H b' 0 z 1-'

::r:: ~

rt 0 ~-~ 1-j [/) I-' 0 g 1-'

s 0 C4 !D

I~ IJ-1-+L'

rl-+ ------1

----;

H-,_,_, .:,:' '

' -t:;--!:]1-~ i .... I

Apprc!>V

App.roved For Release 2000/08/10 : CIA-RDP96-00787R0001 00020001-0

(d) Experiments with Geiger Counter

As part of a continuing search for mechanisms involved in para-

normal phenomena, a series of experiments were conducted with Subject 1

to determine whether a geiger counter in the 'Y - r;J.y mode (i.e.,

beta shield in place) would register subject-directed efforts.

Th t f . t e ou put o a ge1.ger counter, fed into a Monsanto lt!odel

1020 counter/timer, indicates a background count due to cosmie rays

~ 35 counts/minute. Experimental protocol requires the subject to try

to change the registered count by concentration on the geiger counter

probe from a distance ~ 0.5 meters. Each run consists of 15 60-second

trial::l, with 10-second separations 'l:lEltween the trials. Preceding each

subject run is a control run of equal duration.

In four runs to date the results, shown in Table 6, indicate

no effect of e mean nor standard .-

deviation of counts.

+ OCDM Item No. CD V-700, Model No. 66, Electro-Neutronics, Inc.,

Oakland, CA.

Approved For Release 2000/08/10: CIA-RDP96-00787R000100020001-0 RS 18


TABLE 6

Geiger Counter Experiment

Control Runs Experimental Runs

.Run Mean Standard Deviatio Mean 8 t '11 rl "l.rrl n,,,. ui "'r i rm

1 36,07 5.73 35.33 6.00

2 34.87 6.23 33.87 7.27 .

3 33.87 5,88 34.00 5.25

4 35.20 5.09 35.67 5.77

I



5. Basic Research Summary

The basic research program to date has been spread over a number

of subjects and over number of activities, generating a considerable amount

of data. It was deemed desirable in the first half of the research program

to cover as much material as possible in a horizontal development in order

to determine the best subjects and the fruitful directions for concentrated

effort in the second half of the program.

We intend to concentrate on analysis of the large amounts of data

already obtained while subjects are involved in extramural medical and psy-

chological testing. Based on the findings, a few carefully-chosen items

will be culled for final specific testing following discussion with client

represen tatiyes.


r

I


APPENDIX 1

' Randomness Tests of Four-State Electronic Random Stimulus Generator

The design objective was to build a four-state machine, with each

state equally likely to occur on each trial, independent of the past

sequence of states. If the machine meets this objective, it should not

be possible to devise a rule for future play that significantly differs .,

from chance. A simple example of such a rule would be to select the machine~-

state observed in the preceding trial; if this strategy were to produce

scores significantly above chance (25 percent hits), we would reject the

hypothesis of randomness of the machine under test.

Before experimentation, four machines, purchased from Aquarius

Electronics, Albion, California, were extensively tested for randomness.

Data were analyzed on a CDC-6400 computer, and three machines finally

selected for use in screening met established criteria for randomness.

In developing randomness tests, we, are guided in part by a knowledge

of the machine logic. When one of the four choice keys or the pass key is

depressed, the current machine state is displayed; then a brief ti

projet stargate cia-rdp96-00787r000100020001-0

Documents